# Explain coefficient domain handling in groebner()'s docstring #5555

Open
opened this Issue Jun 8, 2011 · 7 comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
Contributor

### pernici commented Jun 8, 2011

 ``````groebner does not give the groebner basis in monic form. sdp_groebner does, but then polytools.groebner changes the normalizazion when domain.has_Field is False. see e.g. the cyclic5 lex example: >>> from sympy import * >>> x0,x1,x2,x3,x4 = X = symbols('x0,x1,x2,x3,x4') >>> I = [x0 + x1 + x2 + x3 + x4, x0*x1 + x0*x4 + x1*x2 + x2*x3 + x3*x4, x0*x1*x2 + x0*x1*x4 + x0*x3*x4 + x1*x2*x3 + x2*x3*x4, x0*x1*x2*x3 + x0*x1*x2*x4 + x0*x1*x3*x4 + x0*x2*x3*x4 + x1*x2*x3*x4, x0*x1*x2*x3*x4 - 1] >>> G = groebner(I, X, order='lex') >>> G[1] 275*x1**2 + 825*x1*x4 + 550*x3**6*x4 + 1650*x3**5*x4**2 + 275*x3**4*x4**3 - 550*x3**3*x4**4 + 275*x3**2 - 566*x3*x4**11 - 69003*x3*x4**6 + 69019*x3*x4 - 1467*x4**12 - 178981*x4**7 + 179073*x4**2 instead x1**2 should be normalized to 1 Setting by hand domain.has_Field = True one gets the correct normalization; this function should find that for this example domain.has_Field = True. `````` Original issue for #5555: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/107755593449647463741/ Original owner: https://code.google.com/u/101069955704897915480/
Member

### mattpap commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````The last part, i.e. "domain.has_Field = True" in this example is not True, because the initial coefficient domain is integer ring (it doesn't matter that Groebner bases are computed over a field). If you want the resulting basis to be over a field, tell groebner() precisely what you want to achieve, e.g.: In [1]: F = [x*y - 2*y, 2*y**2 - x**2] In [2]: groebner(F, order='grevlex') Out[2]: ⎡ 3 2 2 2 ⎤ ⎣x - 2⋅x , - x + 2⋅y , x⋅y - 2⋅y⎦ In [3]: groebner(F, order='grevlex', field=True) Out[3]: ⎡ 2 ⎤ ⎢ 3 2 x 2 ⎥ ⎢x - 2⋅x , - ── + y , x⋅y - 2⋅y⎥ ⎣ 2 ⎦ All functions in sympy.polys always find a minimal coefficient domain for input polynomials, if needed, extend it to perform computations and retract it to the original domain if possible. In the case of groebner() the simples what to specify what you want is to set field=True. You can also say domain=QQ, but this will make your code useless for composite domains, finite fields, etc. btw. When you submit a bug report, use a minimal example that reproduces a problem (unless a minimal example is that big). That saves time and makes it possible to reply with the same example, not with a shorter, but unrelated one. Also please explain why something should or should not be done ("should be normalized to 1"). **Labels:** Polynomial `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c1 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/101069955704897915480/
Member

### asmeurer commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````So should this be marked as WontFix, or is there still an issue here? `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c2 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/asmeurer@gmail.com/
Member

### mattpap commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````Lets see if there will be any rationale for a different behavior. If not, this is WontFix, because the current behavior is intended, coherent (across sympy.polys) and tested. This is also how other symbolic systems work. `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c3 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/101069955704897915480/
Contributor

### pernici commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````Thank you for the explanation; I understand now that this is not a bug. Mario `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c4 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/107755593449647463741/
Member

### mattpap commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````OK. **Status:** WontFix `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c5 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/101069955704897915480/
Member

### mattpap commented Jun 7, 2011

 ``````Actually it would be good to explain this behavior in groebner()'s docstring. **Summary:** Explain coefficient domain handling in groebner()'s docstring **Status:** Accepted **Owner:** matt...@gmail.com `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c6 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/101069955704897915480/
Member

### asmeurer commented Mar 20, 2012

 ``````**Status:** Valid `````` Original comment: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2456#c7 Original author: https://code.google.com/u/asmeurer@gmail.com/

### skirpichev added a commit to skirpichev/diofant that referenced this issue Oct 6, 2018

``` Document some options for groebner() function ```
`Closes sympy/sympy#5555`
``` 78221b7 ```

### skirpichev added a commit to skirpichev/diofant that referenced this issue Oct 6, 2018

``` Document some options for groebner() function ```
`Closes sympy/sympy#5555`
``` 0596f41 ```

### skirpichev added a commit to skirpichev/diofant that referenced this issue Oct 7, 2018

``` Document some options for groebner() function ```
`Closes sympy/sympy#5555`
``` 7e081a5 ```